Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. In our view, the requirement of obtaining previous sanction of the Charity Commissioner under Section 36(1)(a) of the said Act to sell or alienate the immovable property belonging to a public trust is mandatory and the power can be exercised only on the application made under Section 36(1)(c) by a trust or the trustees, seeking authorization to dispose of such property. Any sale or alienation of an immovable property of the public trust without such sanction is null and void. While deciding such application, the Charity Commissioner has to have regard to the interest, benefit and the protection of the trust. The power cannot be exercised suo motu or on his own 20 wp3483.15.odt by the Charity Commissioner. The power to grant sanction includes power to refuse sanction on the ground that it is not in the interest and benefit of the trust and that the property needs to be protected.

(i) to declare the sale-deed in respect of the public trust property. as null and void, or to set it aside, whether executed before or after initiation of proceedings or revocation of sanction, and (ii) to direct recovery of property of the public trust either before or after execution of the sale-deed. These are also not the automatic consequences in law to necessarily follow, upon passing of an order under Section 36(2) of the said Act. These are the steps to be taken after the sanction is revoked. We are, therefore, of the view that the order of revocation of sanction and the direction to take steps to recover the property only provide cause of action to seek a declaration from the Court of competent jurisdiction that the sale-deed executed on the basis of such sanction is null and void or to set it aside and to pass a decree for recovery of possession of the suit property.

In view of the aforesaid law laid down, once it is found that the order granting sanction to sell or alienate an immovable property of a public trust is vitiated on any one or all the grounds mentioned under Section 36(2) of the said Act, it will be treated as nullity, having no existence in law. If the order is nullity, then the principle of merger would not be attracted.

17. We now proceed to deal with the contention that once the sale-deed is executed on the basis of the sanction granted 29 wp3483.15.odt under Section 36(1)(a) of the said Act, the only remedy available to the aggrieved person is to file a civil suit under Section 50 of the said Act and it is only the Civil Court which has exclusive jurisdiction to declare the sale-deed as null and void and pass a decree for recovery of the public trust property which is sold. The reliance is placed upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dr. Sam Sarosh, cited supra, wherein it is held in Para 11 that the remedies provided under Sections 50, 51 and 52-A are not dependent upon revocation of sanction accorded by the Charity Commissioner under Section 36(1) of the said Act and these are the independent remedies.